Details of assessment carried out: Published literature

Brief summary on why the use has been assessed/judged to be sustainable or unsustainable: A resource survey was conducted for P. sidoides in 2010 which aimed to quantify the overall population size, assess harvesting pressure and give recommendations for sustainable harvesting of the species. This resource survey found that only a relatively small percentage of sites where this species occurs were being harvested (6%). It was also found that P. sidoides is a vigorous resprouter and plants rapidly re-establish from rootstock fragments that remain post harvest. It was therefore determined that the continued commercial harvesting of P. sidoides was sustainable and would not significantly lower the conservation status of his species as long as basic guidelines aimed at ensuring that harvesting is carried out sustainably are developed and adhered to. In 2022, a repeat resource assessments of the species, which generated an expanded and updated body of information could only detect the presence of harvesting at one site and found a fivefold increase in the number of P. sidoides plants recorded than the number counted for the same areas in 2010. • Parceval (Pty) and Afrigetics Botanicals developed suitable harvesting guidelines for P. sidoides which are designed to provide guidance on techniques and best practices for the sustainable harvesting of the species. Updated harvester guidelines have been developed by TRAFFIC in close collaboration with relevant stakeholders. • Effective policing and enforcement of harvesting regulations and guidelines, over the extremely wide and often remote extent of occurrence for this species, by government institutions, is likely to prove to be practically impossible. It is therefore recommended that the consumers (i.e. natural products companies) should, in conjunction with relevant government agencies and harvesters, establish a code of procurement ethics that is enforceable. Such a code of standards should prohibit unethical procurement from harvesters or harvesting co-ordinators that do not adhere strictly to harvesting guidelines, and should address the following aspects: 1. identification of subpopulations which may be harvested, 2. prohibition of harvesting within Protected Areas. The subpopulations of P. sidoides included in Protected Areas constitute natural ‘gene banks’ which help to ensure the conservation of genetic variation within the species, provide protection from the potential over-utilisation of the species in unprotected areas and provide valuable control sites for monitoring studies. 3. prohibition of unauthorised harvesting on private land, 4. introduction of relevant harvesting documents which trace the plant material back to a specific harvesting locality, and record the date and harvested quantity for each batch purchased, 5. adherence to guidelines on harvesting frequency, 6. adherence to percentage of plants comprising a subpopulation that may be harvested during each harvesting event, 7. adherence to preliminary guidelines on the timing of harvesting, aimed at minimising impacts to the plants and their habitat, as provided in the 2010 Pelargonium resource survey (De Castro & Brits, 2010), and 8. adherence to recommended methods of rootstock extraction, including implements used (picks cause less disturbance than hoes), size of excavation (i.e. single defined hole versus the highly destructive practice of overturning large sods of earth), immediate replacement and light compaction of removed soil and planting of remaining root fragments and shoots. • In the resource assessments conducted in 2022, only one site was being harvested. However, it was noted that plants were being discarded and harvesting holes were not refilled, thus promoting erosion, which suggested that pre and post harvesting training is needed. • Harvester training takes place in each of the villages before harvesting season begins on the basis of existing guidelines • Harvesters are required to have permits when harvesting within protected areas and should have written permission when harvesting on private land. Harvest permits are additionally provided to Traditional Leaders and private landowners at no additional costs. Traditional Leaders work with industry to decide on sustainable offtake and industry has a list of names and identification numbers for each area, controlled and overseen by Traditional leaders. This ensures greater control over permit transgressions and overharvesting than when permits are issued by community members. • A bioprospecting permit issued to industry which is valid for a period of five years. One of the permit conditions is the requirement to submit reports on the volumes harvested and from where it was harvested on an annual basis to the department. • Small and isolated subpopulations of P. sidoides should not be harvested. • Commercial planting of P. sidoides in secondary grassland of historically cultivated areas, both on communal grazing land and on private land should be strongly encouraged. Costs incurred by the landowners would be minimal as, due to the fact that this species is not browsed by livestock to any significant extent, the planted areas would not have to be fenced and could still be used for grazing. • Wild harvesting should be carefully controlled and in some cases avoided in sensitive, spatially restricted and conservation worthy habitats (e.g. Temporary sheet-rock wetlands on the sandstone plateaus of inselbergs/Temporary sheet-rock wetlands in a valley-head landscape position on basalts at high elevations in mountainous areas of the eastern Free State) • Plant density and vigour at harvested subpopulations is likely to recover more rapidly if sound harvesting practices such as the replacement of soil, root fragments and shoots are carried out once the rootstock has been removed. The species is widespread and abundant in southern Africa, specifically South Africa and Lesotho, and has an extent of occurrence (EOO) on 702 764 km2 and wild harvesting is believed to have a negligible effect on the species’ persistence as it appears to be limited to Eastern Cape and Free State provinces. P. sidoides is reported to be a vigorous resprouter and has been shown to re-establish from rootstock fragments left behind after harvesting. Available data and observations suggest that intervals of a 6 years between harvesting events are in most cases likely to be sufficient to allow for the re-establishment and recovery of harvested subpopulations and ensure long-term sustainable harvesting. Plant density and vigour at harvested subpopulations is likely to recover more rapidly if sound harvesting practices such as the replacement of soil, root fragments and shoots are carried out once the rootstock has been removed. It has also been reported to thrive in overgrazed and disturbed terrains. There was an observed increase in the P. sidoides population by five fold when comparing the results of the resource survey conducted in 2010 and that conducted in 2022 in the same areas. Harvesting was only reported to be occurring in only 6% of sites during the 2010 resource survey assessments and was only detected at one site in 2022. In both studies resprouting was evident in previously harvested sites.

Brief summary on why the use has been assessed/judged to be sustainable or unsustainable: Trade is conducted in an equitable manner which results in the fair allocation of benefits to all resource stakeholders.